There was a dead comment in this thread that I can't respond to now. It came from legitimate grievances but embodied what I think is a dangerous and now popular

There was a dead comment in this thread that I can't respond to now. It came from legitimate grievances but embodied what I think is a dangerous and now popular sentiment. It seemed to have been mocking the language of the speech when there really isn't anything objectively wrong with the speech. The speech was in a high register but I thought it was very concise. The parody in the comment on the other hand seems to try to immitate religious language, and didn't attack the speech but the speakers and their values. It's as if the commenter perceives the academic register used in the speech as marking its contents unworthy of engaging with, the ivory tower ramblings of the elites as nonsensical and contemptible as religious rhetoric. This sort of contempt for everything associated with the upper class leads to the kind of cultural destruction we saw in Communist revolutions. Hate the elite all you want but the culture they embody is also your culture; don't cut off your nose to spite your face.